Thursday's letters to the editor

January 31, 2013

Paper takes liberal stance

I used to look forward to reading the morning paper along with a cup of coffee. But on Jan. 28, the first two pages consisted of three gay stories, and the letters page contained five anti-gun and one pro-abortion letter.

Your social engineering obsession really disgusts me, to the point that I, like many others, contemplate canceling my subscription and watching Fox News for my news. At least they have not become "Pravda-esque" by totally devoting itself to the ruling party's propaganda.

I don't remember a day going by without a gay-agenda story or opinion being featured. Your columnist and cartoonists regularly resort to name-calling and belittling people who have a different opinion or lifestyle.

I would say that for every 10 liberal letters or opinions, you may print one conservative. You are not winning any converts, but you are turning off many readers with your heavily lopsided coverage. How about acting like a traditional newspaper and report news objectively? I am a straight, Caucasian, pro-life, Christian, conservative gun owner.

Can I do any more to annoy your staff?

Jim Surdi, Margate

Liberals never owntheir wrong

On Jan. 28 there were six people who wrote their views on your letters page. All six were liberals complaining about the Republicans and their views on six different subjects.

Finding all six writers whining was disturbing enough, but not to have even one conservative view is rather biased to say the least. I thought the Sun Sentinel moved to the center a little when they endorsed Mitt Romney. Wishful thinking.

The only thing I can say is typical liberals: Never responsible, always blaming.

Just give it a rest, stop complaining. Your guy won.

Georgiann Bria, Fort Lauderdale

Make some exceptionsto driving ban

I disagree on the 100 percent ban on texting while driving. The ban should only prohibit recreational texting, not emergency texting. Distractions while driving are a major issue, and cell phones are one of the primary causes.

Distractions do cause accidents. However, in the case of an emergency, people should be allowed to text or call a relative, friend or police station. For example, if you feel a stranger is following you, quickly texting for help is important for safety.

Also, to eliminate distractions, some smart phones have voice-activated apps such as Siri, which requires pressing only one button to text. If pulled over by an officer for texting, proving the reason for the text is easy, given that phones show the time, date and saved message.

Driving comes with many different distractions and worries, but drivers should be able to text in an emergency situation. As far as the law, distractions should be eliminated, but what about emergencies? Where do you draw the line?

Jordan Maurodis, Lighthouse Point

Need laws that prohibit guns in certain places

I write to applaud Martin Dyckman's Jan. 22 op-ed piece, which speaks to people like me, who support an aggressive legislative effort by the federal and state governments to reduce — if not eliminate — access to firearms.

Dyckman accurately makes the point that the last word from the U.S. Supreme Court (District of Columbia v. Heller) does not grant an unfettered, unlimited right to possess a firearm.

The court said citizens of the District were permitted to possess handguns in their homes for their personal protection, but in no way did the ruling preclude government from passing laws that would limit the number, type and size of the firearm. Nor did it preclude "concealed carry."

The NRA, tea party and other gun-rights advocates who claim an absolute right to possess and carry a firearm under the Second Amendment are intentionally and egregiously misleading the public. I am uncomfortable with the real possibility that the person sitting next to me at a theater, ballgame or parking lot has a pistol on his or her person.

There appears to be no lawful reason why the 2013 Florida Legislature cannot enact laws prohibiting firearms from places where Florida residents assemble.

I strongly disagree with the Jan. 26 letter writer who says that had Mitt Romney been elected, his promise of jobs and growth would be fulfilled. Jobs and growth have been slow, but considering where President Obama began, it's been steady under the most difficult of conditions.

If Mr. Romney is a good American who loves his country, and I am sure he does, he would step forward and accept the president's invitation, offer his expertise and tell us how he would create the 12 million jobs he promised in his campaign.

The president has done his best to hold his hand out to anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, if they can produce results for the best interests of our country.